Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Signing] Canucks sign F Sam Gagner [3 year x $3.15M AAV]


Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

There value today wont get that type of return.  Shelter them in the NHL, inflate their NHL numbers and Bingo. 

 

AHL numbers don't hold much in value, at best your getting back a reclamation project.   

Colorado keeps on talking about how they want 21 year olds for Landeskog and Duschene.  How are you going to get 21 year olds with NHL numbers???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

I do think that defense isn't absolutely objective and quantified through points.  So for an offensive player to be trade it may even benefit to be on a bad team with less structure, but for a good defensive player I would say that it would help to be a on a good team.

There's merit to this logic, but the Hamonic deal sort of derails that.. 

 

7 minutes ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

I don't have any specific evidence to back it up, but I would say that it is intuitively correct.  You don't see a lot of teams trading away players at the deadline or at the end of the season when they are on the brink of being a playoff team; but that is precisely what they should be doing if they were truly asset managing.  As again the goal is to win the cup not make it into the 8th seed.  I am fairly positive that Nashville would've received a massive offer for say Ekholm at the trade deadline.

That's what we should be doing but we like to dip our toes in both sides of the creek. 

 

7 minutes ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

I don't agree that we are going to lose no matter what.  Nothing stays still.  Teams decay.  Again improvement isn't linear.  Regression isn't either.  Boeser or Goldobin or even Virtanen could score 40 next year.  That makes everything else irrelevant as that would make us a playoff team. 

Well there's only room for one of those players and considering Matthews is the last players to score 40 as a rookie in a long time i wouldn't hold my breath.  Team around us have gotten much better, while we are full of question marks.  Hope is nice to have, but it's not a liable plan.

 

7 minutes ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

I also think you are unfairly riding Gagner.  I think he is a good player, and he is a playmaking centerman.  That is important when most of our young players are wingers.  Goldobin, Boeser, and Virtanen aren't going to hit max potential playing with Grindy McGrinderson (Sutter, whom I love as a RW).  The Sedins need a very specific player, and Bo is a lot more of a playmaker than I ever though; but I would still contend that Ganger is the best type of centerman to develop our young wingers.

I actually don't mind Gagner,  just wished we stuck to 2 year limits in UFA this year.  Gagner isn't a center, he's not strong enough defensively.  i like goldy with the twins, and brock with bo and sven.  Virtanen plays a north south game so he' could fit with gagner, but there simply aren't enough roster spots to have all 3 (or even 2) in the line up next year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

There's merit to this logic, but the Hamonic deal sort of derails that.. 

 

That's what we should be doing but we like to dip our toes in both sides of the creek. 

 

Well there's only room for one of those players and considering Matthews is the last players to score 40 as a rookie in a long time i wouldn't hold my breath.  Team around us have gotten much better, while we are full of question marks.  Hope is nice to have, but it's not a liable plan.

 

I actually don't mind Gagner,  just wished we stuck to 2 year limits in UFA this year.  Gagner isn't a center, he's not strong enough defensively.  i like goldy with the twins, and brock with bo and sven.  Virtanen plays a north south game so he' could fit with gagner, but there simply aren't enough roster spots to have all 3 (or even 2) in the line up next year. 

The Islanders were good the last couple of years, won a playoff round last year and got much better under Weight, so I am not sure that is the same like a 29th placed team that finished out of the playoffs 3 of the last 4 seasons.  Context is important...

 

in order to do the whole asset management bit.  You have to dip your toes in both side of the creek.  You have to try to be good, and then sell because you know you aren't goo enough.  You can only get maximum value from a position of strength in a negotiation.  That isn't by being the 29th best team in the league.

 

2 year and 3 year isn't a huge difference, and it was for 3M.  I mean come on you are really splitting hairs on this one.  He can definitely be a center with Sutter on his wing.  I think and hope that this is actually the plan.  I mean a line of Granlund-Gagner-Sutter would have no defensive issues.  A line of Virtanen-Gagner-Sutter is very similar to what Columbus put out there.  Goldobin-Gagner-Sutter could be a nice way to break in Goldy.  Lots of options here.  Maybe this gets Gaunce going with a Gaunce-Gagner-Sutter line.  I mean there really isn't a lot to complain about here.  Maybe not ideal, but definitely not worth this level of passion.

 

I wouldn't mind

 

Baertschi Horvat Eriksson

Granlund Gagner Sutter

Sedin Sedin Rodin

Gaunce Chaput Dorsett

 

With

Goldobin Dahlen Boeser as the top line in the minors with Virtanen getting time with the crew too

 

Toronto esque for all the lovers of Lou and his amazing asset management.

 

Now if one of Goldobin, Boeser, Dahlen, or Virtanen blows the doors down.  I don't mind the idea of having a kid line as a 4th line either.  Sedin style 12 min a night with 2nd unit PP time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

Colorado keeps on talking about how they want 21 year olds for Landeskog and Duschene.  How are you going to get 21 year olds with NHL numbers???

When have they said they want 21 year olds, Sakic either wanted a A prospect like Chabot or Sergachev or they wanted a under 25 D like Slavin, and have been in on Ekholm as well. 

 

There's looking for a Johansen/Jones type deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

When have they said they want 21 year olds, Sakic either wanted a A prospect like Chabot or Sergachev or they wanted a under 25 D like Slavin, and have been in on Ekholm as well. 

 

There's looking for a Johansen/Jones type deal.

Good luck wit dat.  I don't really see that happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

The Islanders were good the last couple of years, won a playoff round last year and got much better under Weight, so I am not sure that is the same like a 29th placed team that finished out of the playoffs 3 of the last 4 seasons.  Context is important...

 

in order to do the whole asset management bit.  You have to dip your toes in both side of the creek.  You have to try to be good, and then sell because you know you aren't goo enough.  You can only get maximum value from a position of strength in a negotiation.  That isn't by being the 29th best team in the league.

 

2 year and 3 year isn't a huge difference, and it was for 3M.  I mean come on you are really splitting hairs on this one.

I've stated from the start that it's not the end of the world, just two years is more ideal. but because that's not exactly what JB did, people feel they need to come here to justify the 3 year.

 

4 minutes ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

  He can definitely be a center with Sutter on his wing.  I think and hope that this is actually the plan.  I mean a line of Granlund-Gagner-Sutter would have no defensive issues.  A line of Virtanen-Gagner-Sutter is very similar to what Columbus put out there.  Goldobin-Gagner-Sutter could be a nice way to break in Goldy.  Lots of options here.  Maybe this gets Gaunce going with a Gaunce-Gagner-Sutter line.  I mean there really isn't a lot to complain about here.  Maybe not ideal, but definitely not worth this level of passion.

I don't see him playing center full time.  Sutter is too important in the dot and will be put up against teams strongest comp that's not the situation that have brought gagner success in the past.  He's thrived playing against weaker comp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Weak.

 

Don't quote me out of context attempting to use my post to qualify your opinion, particularly when you're misrepresenting my position.

 

You cherry picked that quote (didn't even quote the post itself - either to avoid the notification or the fact you've taken it out of context) from the Ryan Spooner discussion.

 

Spooner and Gagner are not equivalent assets, not by a longshot.

 

My point in not being too keen on the Spooner option was that he is necessarily a winger at this point - very weak faceoff guy (38%) - and as such would be displacing a young winger - you'll notice that every player I listed there is a winger.  He's also left handed, and doesn't represent the same kind of powerplay option that Gagner does.  And finally, as an RFA, his rights would have cost something, whereas Gagner is an asset free UFA.

 

Gagner is a viable center - and moreover is right-handed, unlike Spooner - meaning he's both a better powerplay option - and he could be used as a bottom six center - in which case he could actually enhance the production of a young winger or two - like Goldobin or Virtanen, Gaunce - in a similar role to the one he played in Columbus.

 

You just never know when to stop.  I wasted enough time in this thread on a 'discussion' with you and won't be wasting any more after this (so have your patented, tedious, dog-on-a-bone last word and be done with it) - but don't attempt to take an out of context quote of mine (which you necro'd from a dead thread from May lol) to prop up a weak opinion of your own, in an entirely different context.

I agree with this point and would add that DelZ will also bring a more offensive minded aspect to the team as well.  Gagner is a far better option than Sutter for adding young, skilled players to the wing.  His defensive game is far better than what it used to be and he is a very good playmaker.  Either Eriksson or Baer on a line with Gagner would be a huge boost to a player like Goldobin; who has great goal scoring potential, but needs sheltering due to his lack of defensive skills.  Seeing as Eriksson can play on either wing, his playmaking abilities and defensive acumen would be effective with any of the offensive minded prospects.

 

I don't see either Gagner or DelZ as 'place holders' as they will be effectively supporting young players while helping the team develop a more offensive minded game.  Hopefully we end up enjoying some exciting (if not winning) hockey along the way.

 

Although the term is a bit long, I am happy that there are no NTCs for any of the new players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

I've stated from the start that it's not the end of the world, just two years is more ideal. but because that's not exactly what JB did, people feel they need to come here to justify the 3 year.

 

I don't see him playing center full time.  Sutter is too important in the dot and will be put up against teams strongest comp that's not the situation that have brought gagner success in the past.  He's thrived playing against weaker comp.

I still don't see why they cant play together?  Why can't Sutter take the face-offs like he did when play with Henrik?  Why do we need the tough matchup guy when we are a bad team?  Roll 4 lines relatively even ice time outside of BO's line.

 

The kids need to learn to play in all situations.

 

Gagner was brought in to be a top 9 forward.  Sutter is a top 9 forward.  Horvat and Henrik have two center spots locked down in the top 9.  So that leaves one spot, one spot for the perfect centerman (Sutter/Gagner).  It just makes too much sense that it hurts my brain as to why this isn't obvious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Why did TSN 1040 hire Botchford? He goes on how Gagner was a terrible idea. I get that he's not a fan of Canucks management. But he doesn't blast Toronto for signing Marleau for $6.25 million and a NMC for 3 years?

 

B-otch is a Toronto transplant in the first place.

 

And a product of the exceedingly low quality of print media in the twitter age. 

 

Was a great fit as the crypt-keeper's sidekick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Hutton Wink said:

Already projected Rodin and Burmistrov make the opening night roster, with Gagner in the fold.  Goldy goes down, and will be one of the first call-ups.  Same with Virtanen, Molino, and Holm.  And yes, part of that is waivers eligibility.  Just the reality of the business.

I'm sure some of CDC will want to lynch me for even suggesting this but Goldobin is almost certainly Utica bound IMO. The only part of his game that's NHL ready (based off of last year anyway) is his offense. 

 

And while that offense looks pretty damn good, if he can't up his pace, battle level and puck pursuit, he's going to have a hard time cracking an NHL roster. Undeniable offensive skills or otherwise.

 

Virtanen, likewise, needs at least part of this year to take the foundational stuff he learned last year and build some offense back in to his game on top of it. Get his mojo and confidence back while ideally, playing with some actual offensive players this year.

 

Saying that, both guys could easily come in this fall, blow the doors off and earn spots. What a lovely problem that would be. If that's the case though, Gagner's still not roadblocking either of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

And gagner makes us what as 27th placed team :picard:

 

Oh I forget the reason our PP sucked is because we needed another soft perimeter play maker......:picard::picard:

Judging by the way the last couple of lottos went.  Wouldn't we be better off picking in that slot?!??!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Oh I know, they will defend everything, the best is when they defend something even when it contradicts what the stance they were defending before.  

 

"Don't trade lack he's the future, miller is old and washed up" JB trades lack and keeps miller, "Miller is awesome, so glad we kept him"

"Canucks shouldn't sign a lucic player, we don't need the big long term contract" JB signs LE to a big long term contract "good job JB he will get 40 goals next year playing with the twins"

"WD shouldn't be fired he's a good coach", WD gets fired, "Awesome job JB, we needed a new coach"

"BO should be on the forth line it evens out everything"  the next game WD takes bo off the 4th line "Bo is a 2nd line player, the coach knows what he's doing"

"Larsen is a low risk move it only cost a 5th. Moving Kassian and adding a 5th was worth it for prust, 5th's never turn out"  JB drafts Gaudette and Forsling with a 5th round pick "JB is a god at drafting in the 5th round"

 

It goes on and on.  A bunch of sheep

Sounds like you are showing opposing sides of the argument rather than what certain posters are contradicting themselves.. you are grasping.  Never though you'd go full rockstar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, J.R. said:

I'm sure some of CDC will want to lynch me for even suggesting this but Goldobin is almost certainly Utica bound IMO. The only part of his game that's NHL ready (based off of last year anyway) is his offense. 

 

And while that offense looks pretty damn good, if he can't up his pace, battle level and puck pursuit, he's going to have a hard time cracking an NHL roster. Undeniable offensive skills or otherwise.

 

Virtanen, likewise, needs at least part of this year to take the foundational stuff he learned last year and build some offense back in to his game on top of it. Get his mojo and confidence back while ideally, playing with some actual offensive players this year.

 

Saying that, both guys could easily come in this fall, blow the doors off and earn spots. What a lovely problem that would be. If that's the case though, Gagner's still not roadblocking either of them.

I agree here, I think if these young guys like Virtanen and Goldobin prove that they are ready, it'll be someone like Chaput (darn:rolleyes:), Gaunce or even Dorsett that gets pushed out of a spot. Gagner will be on the 2nd or 3rd line in Vancouver and because of this, it's the 4th liners that need to fight for their jobs.

 

As for the 2 year vs 3 year issue, I really don't think the 3rd year hurts at all. By year 3, Gagner will only be 30 years old and likely still on the 2nd or 3rd line. Also, as much as I like the Sedins, they likely only have 1 or 2 years left. They're too proud to play much longer than that and will have retired by the time Gaganer is entering year 3 of this deal and the Canucks will be left with Eriksson, Sutter and Gagner as the veterans among the forward group. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

I still don't see why they cant play together?  Why can't Sutter take the face-offs like he did when play with Henrik?  Why do we need the tough matchup guy when we are a bad team?  Roll 4 lines relatively even ice time outside of BO's line.

Because, the team is still expected to attempt to win games.  We wouldn't have fired WD is we were just going to have a puppet behind the bench.  Match up are going to play a big role next year. Especially when it comes to shelter any young players making the team

 

1 hour ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

The kids need to learn to play in all situations.

Because that can be a confidence killer.  Getting burned every night against some of the leagues best doesn't really help.  Someone is going to have to play against, Getzlaf, Mcdavid, Johnny elf, and i'd prefer that guy to be sutter.  Sutter Eriksson and granny works.  Perhaps gagner could fit but that will really hurt his expected production. 

 

1 hour ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

Gagner was brought in to be a top 9 forward.  Sutter is a top 9 forward.  Horvat and Henrik have two center spots locked down in the top 9. 

Exactly why I wasn't fond of the signing.  I'd rather roll with

Sedin sedin ____

Baer Bo ____

Granny Sutter Eriksson

Chaput. gaunce Dorsett

 

And have Brock, Rodin, Boucher, Goldy, Burmistrov and Jake battle for those final to spots two top 9 spots. The one signing i wouldn't have minded was a fourth line player/center with a bit of size and defensive zone ability.  Someone to help dorsett in the weight department and also to help sutter in the match up area.  That would allow Bo to take on a more offensive role.

 

1 hour ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

So that leaves one spot, one spot for the perfect centerman (Sutter/Gagner).  It just makes too much sense that it hurts my brain as to why this isn't obvious.

Because we will need a match up line.  And sutter is that guy, while Gagner isn't. JR suggests Sutter to the fourth line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, higgyfan said:

Either Eriksson or Baer on a line with Gagner would be a huge boost to a player like Goldobin; who has great goal scoring potential, but needs sheltering due to his lack of defensive skills.  Seeing as Eriksson can play on either wing, his playmaking abilities and defensive acumen would be effective with any of the offensive minded prospects.

I think that this move may actually have been made precisely with those young wingers in mind.

 

I proposed that they add a depth center - ie John Mitchell - a good faceoff guy, hard to play against type.

But that would most likely have sealed the 4th line as a traditional 4th - most likely made up of Gaunce Mitchell Dorsett.

Which then meant that finding a fit for Goldobin or Virtanen in the lineup was a puzzle.

 

Baer Bo Brock

Sedins Granny

Eriksson Sutter  ?

 

That third line would be a matchup line - Goldobin is not a good fit there.  He also doesn't have the forechecking, two way, cycle game to play with the Sedins any more than situationally, so not really a good fit there - and displacing Boeser imo is probably a non-starter.

Under the current option, Dorsett can be moved up with Eriksson and Sutter, or potentially Jake can step up and earn that spot if he's ready and commands it.

 

So this addition sets up the fourth line as a potential reverse matchup line that can be spotted opportunites as the other three lines can be exposed - and could provide opportunities for guys like Goldobin in an unconventional 'bottom six' role.

If the young guys don't earn it, or there are injuries, they still have the serviceable Chaput for depth, and a handful of wingers competing to earn spots.

Burmistrov is insurance, competition, and a lottery ticket.

 

Regardless, the team has probably built in more diverse options - and matchup potential - with this setup - dual options - over what I proposed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

JR suggests Sutter to the fourth line.

Again, misrepresenting...

 

I want Sutter on a match up line (just like you apparently). That line would likely receive the 2nd or 3rd most minutes most nights. What arbitrary number people care to assign it doesn't particularly factor on my radar.

 

We don't have the personnel for a 'traditional' 1st-4th line. We have the personnel for more of a 2A, 2B, 3A and 3B setup with that 3B line likely being more offensively minded and the minutes spread relatively evenly, accordingly. Guys like Horvat who play 5v5, PK and PP being somewhat outliers with more minutes and  different guys getting more (or less) minutes depending on game to game PK vs PP time, opponent, leading/trailing etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, J.R. said:

Again, misrepresenting...

 

I want Sutter on a match up line (just like you apparently). That line would likely receive the 2nd or 3rd most minutes most nights. What arbitrary number people care to assign it doesn't particularly factor on my radar.

 

We don't have the personnel for a 'traditional' 1st-4th line. We have the personnel for more of a 2A, 2B, 3A and 3B setup with that 3B line likely being more offensively minded and the minutes spread relatively evenly, accordingly. Guys like Horvat who play 5v5, PK and PP being somewhat outliers with more minutes and  different guys getting more (or less) minutes depending on game to game PK vs PP time, opponent, leading/trailing etc.

Sure call it the third line and Gagner on the 4th.  I would have preferred a more conventional 4th line.  Someone playing with Dorsett and Gaunce.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • b3. unpinned this topic
  • -SN- locked this topic

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...